May 9, 2007

Ok. So, the plot was: six dudes from New Jersey buy some guns and storm Fort Dix. The Fort Dix that is full of lots and lots of Army reservists with way, way more guns. And, like, extensive military training and shit. Yes, thank god these terrorists have been caught and locked up before they could be killed within minutes of deciding to carry out the dumbest fucking terrorist plot we’ve ever heard of.

I read that after reading Firedoglake:"The kids at Wonkette have precisely the correct attitude on this one."

The six men planned to purchase rocket-propelled grenade launchers then use them to fire at Humvees at Fort Dix and “light the whole place up,” Chris Christie, the United States attorney in New Jersey, said today. The men had apparently looked at a number of military installations in the Northeast but decided on Fort Dix because they thought it would allow them to kill the greatest number of soldiers and to make a clean escape, officials said.

One of the men had also gained access to the grounds of the base as a pizza delivery man and claimed to be familiar with the layout, Mr. Christie said.

Now, the pizza delivery attack seems absurd too, but it does show that Wonkette's picture of them storming the base was inapt. The words "Fort Dix" may call up a picture of an impermeable fortress in your head, but maybe it actually is easy to drive right into it in a pizza delivery van.

Now, I don't blame bloggers for riffing impetuously on anything than sounds stupid, but of course, you must realize that the idea of hijacking four planes with boxcutters and knocking down buildings would seem like "the dumbest fucking terrorist plot" if it hadn't happened.

199 comments:

Ann, one reason for the kneejerk knocks at these foiled terrorist plots is the "cry wolf" that has gone up so often when something needs to be pushed off the headlines. I certainly am not rushing to that judgment now but the only thing missing here is an elevated threat status and John Ashcroft breathlessly pushing the color red.

What speaks more "volumes" here is that someone could disguise himself as a pizza delivery person and gain immediate access to a military installation, albeit no longer a prime target except for its location near the media center of the world.

I'm not knocking the effort that went into this bust. I'm not a terrorist lover. I just urge caution until we see how this entire thing plays out.

The "clean escape" mention is particularly troubling as that hasn't been the signature of a terrorist attack.

Firedoglake and Wonkette have their fingers firmly fixed in their ears and eyes squeezed shut, chanting this-isn't-happening, this-isn't-happening.

To them, 9/11 was a crime, a one-off event, not some portent for the future. Even when a plot is uncovered, they get to dismiss it, because it never happened, and (here) the terrorists were stupidly brazen. Indeed, it seems they are more suspicious that the claim of a planned terrorist attack is false, put up by Bush to scare us.

Ridicule can be a powerful tool if you're fighting against something. The trick in this case is to make the perpetrators look like morons -- who will want to join a group of morons? (No Political Party jokes please) -- not to make the target look complacent. I'm not sure if those making light of this are up to the task.

As a former Army Reservist, I have to tell you (well, Wonkette) that all those guns are amazingly hard to get to. On a post like Ft. Dix, where the mission is reserve component training, the people with ready access to firearms will tend to be the same people who would have access in, say, downtown Wrightstown. That is, on and off duty cops/MPs.

Fort Dix used to be what we called an open base with very little in the way of access control. While my reserve time pre-dates 9/11 by a number of years, I'd be surprised if it's much different today.

In short, it could have worked, maybe not as spectacuarly and the wannabes whould have hoped, but they could have done some damage.

This plot may sound to some like a keystone kops kaper, but it looks like it had a great chance to succeed. This will probably come as a surprise to many but just because soldiers are on a post, they are not usually with their weapons, which are secured separately, and ammunition which is further secured--unless they are engage in a live fire exercise on a firing range somewhere.

Mr. DA has it right, I think. The only people who would have been armed would have been MPs and their sidearms are no match for automatic weapons or grenades.

1. They weren't going to storm the Post or disguise themselves as pizza deliverymen.

The family of one of the plotters owned a pizza shop just off post and had legitimate passes to get onto the base.

This approach seems practical.

2. Military post gates are guarded by rent-a-cops. One like Dix covers thousands of wooded undeveloped acres. Think National forest rather than Fort Knox to get a concept of the security perimeter. On post there would have been MP's doing normal police patrols and unarmed soldiers guarding things like motorpools and barracks.

3. Soldiers in a peacetime training environment don't have ready access to weapons and ammunition. The Army likes to prevent thefts accidents. weapons and particularly ammo is kept locked up behind several levels of security at all times. Your average high school has more active armed guards around it than an Army company in garrision.

These guys were not brillant, but not dumb either. If allowed to continue their plot would have killed others beyond themselves.

Precisely! Since the 9/11 acts were not foreseen and since they killed thousands, we now cannot possibly distinguish between threats like that and ones much less significant. They all must be taken seriously. Any six jokers in New Jersey can be as threatening as four gas-filled airplanes.

I love it when you make terrible analogies, professor. It reminds me that any joker can apparently be a law professor.

Seems to me that when these plots are foiled, it's simply chalked up to a couple dumbassess who couldn't chew gum and walk at the same time.

Then again crticisims abound when warning signs are ignored and some 'troubled student' kills 30+ people with a .22 and 9mm. Since then it was VATech all day every day and a national convulsion over gun control and school security.

I would think 6 guys with AK-47s could probably do a wee bit more damage yet the usual suspects fall back to the nothing to see here position.

So I have to wonder at what point the potential bodycount needs to be when plots are to be taken seriously.

AJD--I must not be following your argument. Clearly in terms of magnitude, these folks would not have killed 3 thousand people. But they could have easily killed hundreds; Are you minimizing its potential impact?

The facts remain that a pizza deliver truck could just tool around the facility.

The fact remains that with all the billions spent supposedly on security, 6 off the street types, neither morons or einsteins, weren't going to attack wall street or the stock exchange or BoA, but an army installation - call it what you will - but something owned and operated by as last I saw, the department of defense.

That the front gates are maned by renta-cops only makes matters worse.

I admire your corrections to misconceptions but frankly that only makes this entire thing stink more.

This plot may sound to some like a keystone kops kaper, but it looks like it had a great chance to succeed.

If you believe that the plot had a good chance to succeed, and if it had succeeded it would have amounted to a significant hit, doesn't that suggest that we should be using more of our resources at home, improving our homeland defense and intelligence services rather than squandering them in Iraq?

If, as some have suggested, Bush's policies have protected us from another terrorist attack in the US since 9/11, what does the opinion that this plot "had a great chance to succeed" say about the effectiveness of those policies?

And if, as some have suggested, we are fighting a critical battle in the "war on terror" in Iraq, why aren't Americans willing to make a small sacrifice and pay for the costs of this battle now, rather than passing the costs on to the next generation?

AL and Cyrus: I understand the point(s) you are making (and please bear in mind, I am not a believer in the fly paper strategy), BUT If you all honestly believe the troops in Iraq would be sufficient to secure the United States from a terrorist attack, especially without violating the posse comitatus act, you greatly overestimate the military's capability. The military is NOT a good anti terror tool for homeland security purposes.

But of course, I know you know that and you are, I believe, arguing more generally for redistributing resources. I dont have a problem with that. You need to address that question to someone other than me.

We need to define success here; when someone staes that the plan could have succeded, do they mean the attack could have killed at least one soldier, or more than a hundred to be considered successful?

My experience with Ft. Dix goes back a few years, and is based on a simple drive thorugh between Philly and MacGuire, but the easiest part of the base to hit, and the most easily accessable by the pizza van would be base housing; not the troops, but their families.

Maybe just the news of an attack would be deemed a success? al queda back on US shores? Even if their were not significant (media numbers) of casualties.

"Thought experiment: Not to minimize the potential loss of life, but had the attack succeeded, what do we suppose the political response would have been?"

Not sure what it would be in the short term, but I've always thought that if a handful of attacks like this were 'successful', that the repercussions for the Muslim community (domestic and international) would be pretty drastic and non-linear in nature. I don't know how to predict the timing of or trigger for this 'tipping point' but I have no doubt that it exists.

Zeb, it would have been a great thing to see a politician mock those governments who backed the uproar over the cartoons. Especially if the Saudis were mocked, who only stoked the fires of outrage (IMO) because it diverted attention from their horrible record of ensuring safety of pilgrims to Mecca.

Cyrus: "what does the opinion that this plot "had a great chance to succeed" say about the effectiveness of those policies?"

Since it was my opinion I suppose I should respond :). First and most obvious: the (alleged) plot was thwarted, so if catching the bad guys before they blow something is the metric of success the policy worked. (unless, of course, the administration gets the blame only for domestic plots that succeed and not credit for thwarting ones that fail)

Second, dont set up the either-or strawman: We are in Iraq as part of an offensive GWOT, and we have increased domestic security as part of a defensive GWOT. You may argue what the appropriate mix is, but you must recognize its two prongs.

The passes for pizza deliveries are not per truck, they are per person. The delivery driver has to go down to the vehicle registration office and register their vehicle, provide documentation and have their picture taken for their ID - it's not a pass, it's an ID. An illegal alien would not be able to get one of those, which already limits the majority of this crew.

The force protection level hasn't changed here, yet, so it doesn't seem the DOA or the DOD or whoever decides these things is taking this threat particularly seriously either. FWIW.

Drill Sgt makes a great point. We have a lot of forested area on this post that would be fairly easy to breech as well. Hmmm.

AL: I was addressing both yours and Cyrus' post. Cyrus' points went more to redistribution than did yours, but the flypaper thing is fundamentally a resource distribution question.

I bear Moslems no hostility. In fact, I have spent two years in Saudi Arabia, in 1987 and 1988 living among Moslems.

That said, precisely who do think is likely to blow you up? You watch the 80 year old norwegian grandma; I will keep my eye on the twenty something moslem man with the beard. And because I keep my eye on him UNTIL I GET TO KNOW HIM is just prudence on my part and not bigotry. I am playing the survival odds.

By the way, AL: I looked back through the comments prior to your posting and be damned if I could see any HATRED. Just how in the hell did you infer that from comments--did you read the sarcasm tag on my post?

Fort Dix used to be what we called an open base with very little in the way of access control. While my reserve time pre-dates 9/11 by a number of years, I'd be surprised if it's much different today.

I'm going to take the middle ground here. Since 9/11 all Army bases (which before 9/11 were generally open--you could drive onto them without a pass) are now closed and all cantonment areas are surrounded by fencing and access controlled. That being said, getting on a base is not all that difficult. Soldiers do indeed order pizza from off-post and a legitimate pizza shop would indeed probably get a permanent gate pass and be able to get on base with the most cursory of inspections.

MPs are the only people who have ready access to guns. It is incorrect to say that military facilities are guarded by "rent-a-cops" or that a small group (six in this case) of terrorists would not face a well-armed and well-trained response. They might be able to spread a lot of havoc but getting off base cleanly would not be an option.

However, this appears to be another case of a bunch of disillusioned friends with no particular intentions who were infiltrated by an FBI informant who became the ring leader and encouraged them to actually plan the attack. The informant is the one who offered to supply the AK's. I bet he is the one who dreamed up the idea of attacking Fort Dix too.

My friend's brother fell into the Christian Identity movement when he moved out to Colorado ten years ago after a bitter divorce (he was raised Lutheran in the suburbs of Chicago). If the FBI took seriously half (make that a quarter) of the shit that comes out of his mouth when he gets on a rant about the Jews and the blacks and the government, he and all his compatriots in Colorado and Idaho would be facing the very same, if not more serious, terrorism charges. And they already have the fully automatic AK-47's, heavy machine guns, and God knows what else. My friend has been out to their compound in Idaho and seen at least part of their arsenal. His brother has shown him the fully automatic (and illegal) AK-47 he keeps in his house in Colorado.

And the FBI is wasting its time and effort on a bunch of Muslim paintball players in New Jersey.

As you can tell from my comments, I am most afraid of people like my friend's brother. White supremacists, extreme christian sects, far right wing radicals, the KKK, and the people who blow up abortion clinics. They are the biggest terrorist threat in this country. Always have been. They are responsible for 5000 or so documented lynchings and who knows how many legally sanctioned deaths between 1880 and 1968. They are still responsible for the second biggest terrorist attack carried out in this country and most of the terrorist and politically motivated bombings and killings carried out over the last twenty years.

Freder: I am not disagreeing with you; what I am suggesting is that there is yet another more recent terrorist group out there: a fringe, fundamentalist jihadist bunch, that seeks to do us evil. Another bunch to be aware of that as I recalled killed nearly 3,000 people. You may not consider them a threat--i do (along with the groups you cite).

You cannot make this shit up. The firedoglakes of the left truly believe the government is to blame for this and all attacks.

Well no, but the government can. I am not saying the government is responsible for these "attacks". What I am saying is that these "plots" they have uncovered probably were encouraged by the FBI informants if they did not constitute entrapment. In some cases were built on nothing more than sheer fantasy and have bordered on prosecuting bad thoughts.

I am basing my skepticism on the documented record of the government in similar cases. How many of these cases have gone to trial Pogo? What has the infamous "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla, after years of torture, actually been charged with? How exactly were those guys who were going to blow up the Sears Tower, going to get to Chicago?

Another bunch to be aware of that as I recalled killed nearly 3,000 people. You may not consider them a threat--i do (along with the groups you cite).

And busting (and most likely committing a huge amount of agency resources) a group of paintball playing pizza delivery guys who even the government admits had absolutely no connection to that group advances that goal how?

Madison Man: Mocking doesn't seem to work well with these people, nor do they react well to it.

They have nurtured and slo-cooked their grudges against Jews, Christians, Europeans, and the west generally for centuries and centuries and centuries, rendering them impervious to most efforts on the west's part to being changes. They are just as equally or more intent upon changing us. They're winning.

That's precisely the problem. You think we're fighting a legal battle when were in fact fighting a war.

The Soviets were wrong to think that capitalism would die because they would sell us the rope by which to hang us. Instead they could more easily have destroyed us from within, employing the victim-based legal system to delete any possibility of self-protection and hack away at the foundations of our constitution until we get Islamic sharia.

Zeb: I agree except that mocking does piss them off. Worth it by itself.

"And busting (and most likely committing a huge amount of agency resources) a group of paintball playing pizza delivery guys who even the government admits had absolutely no connection to that group advances that goal how?"

Freder: you are taking on your punchbowl persona again I think. "paintball playing pizza delivery guys..." who allegedly had automatic weapons and grenades or were trying to get them. Dont you think your description is a bit off the mark?

And where did I say these guys were AQ? I dont get wrapped up in AQ--my concern is jihadis (whom I describe as fundamentalists moslem who are seeking to commit acts of terrorism--that certainly describes the 9/11 perps doesnt it?

As has been said above, Ft. Dix is enormous. Even if security has been beefed up, the place is the size of a city. No walls, nothing like that. Just fences and woods.

A few years ago post 911 I visted a city where another major Army base is located. (I won't say where.) I got lost and drove onto this equally enormous base right through a checkpoint going about 30-40 miles an hour. The guard popped out of his booth and looked at me, but I was long gone. No one ever came after me....

And busting (and most likely committing a huge amount of agency resources) a group of paintball playing pizza delivery guys who even the government admits had absolutely no connection to that group advances that goal how?

Why do you discount the ideological connection? These guys have explicitly described their motivations as being based on their religious beliefs. Is there some particular reason why we should *ignore* that?

The point isn't that Al-Qaeda is directing these groups but that a common ideological framework is directing both Al-Qaeda and these "freelancers". As a society, we still haven't figured out how to resolve the intellectual conflict created by a hostile ideology expressed in the form of a religion.

The leftist media will downplay this terror plot because it doesn't fit their 'freedom fighter' model. Note the copious use of descriptives such as moron, idiot, pizza delivery, etc. all designed to portray the terror cell as inept and not worthy of serious consideration.

The only reason these terrorists were discovered was because a minimum wage clerk making a copy of their film footage tipped off authorities.

The timing of this attack and the Luxor explosion is particularly inconvenient for Harry Reid as he declares the war in Iraq lost. Note to Harry: The terrorist franchise is alive and well and coming to a community near you.Playing down the seriousness and commitment of these terrorists emboldens them and the other cells in this country.

What I am saying is that these "plots" they have uncovered probably were encouraged by the FBI informants if they did not constitute entrapment.

The FBI has to limit its approach to domestic terror as a criminal investigation, much like a drug sting: infiltrate the gang, sleuth out leadership, follow any leads to other gangs, offer up a source for better drug supply, arrange the meet to swap cash for drugs, and then wrap it all up.

I am not saying the government is responsible for these "attacks".

No, but the Moonbats on your side are. They still believe 9-11 was a Reichstag-like event. 35% of Democrats believe Bush knew about the 9-11 attacks in advance and LIHOP*.

Freder: you are taking on your punchbowl persona again I think. "paintball playing pizza delivery guys..." who allegedly had automatic weapons and grenades or were trying to get them. Dont you think your description is a bit off the mark?

Umm no. Read the article carefully. They didn't have automatic weapons and grenades. It was the FBI informant who offered to procure those things for them. The FBI then set up the sting. This is just like the group in Miami. The informant is the one who is going to do all the heavy lifting, procure all the weapons and explosives. Suddenly a bunch of guys who sit around bitching about the government and western culture are plotting attacks and their new "friend" is encouraging them to attack the infidels, and hey, he even knows where he can lay his hands on some explosives and AK-47s.

Next thing you know, they are sitting in jail being threatened with being declared enemy combatants and sent to Gitmo forever if they don't confess and plead guilty and spend the next twenty years in jail.

It is disgusting. Like I said. If this is the standard we are applying, my friend's brother would have been in federal prison long ago.

Fort Dix Jihad: The Media Misses the Point: It’s not about the organization, it’s the ideology.

Quote:If we want to understand why we are at risk from cells in places like Cherry Hill which have no ties to known foreign terror groups, and if we want to learn what authentic, moderate Muslim reformers are up against, we need to open our eyes to what motivates jihadists. It is powerful, enduring and frightening because it is a doctrine, not an organization.

It's kind of funny that in hindsight, now that these sub-human pieces of filth have been caught, people make light of the fact that infiltrating an army base and starting to attack unarmed soldiers is somehow cartoonish and dopey. It doesn't matter whether or not they would have succeeded and some of the knee-jerk responses I've been reading in the sphere make me scratch my head at this fact.

Do these people not realize that you had an independent group of would-be terrorists that were planning this type of scenario and intended to execute it. What if they never took that video to be turned into a DVD? Then you may have had a different situation and one I don't really want to contemplate. Never mind their legal status in this country, but why is it that Islam and Muslims in general always seem to make it difficult for everyone else? Look around the world wherever Muslims are, they are never getting along with anyone, why is that?

The same holds true for Albanian and Turkish Muslims that want to storm Fort Dix. It's Muslims who want to do these things, not Hindus, not Buddhists, not Christians, not even Freemasons. Islamic denial is rife in the leftist camps because they have a common enemy, the US and it's policies. It's no wonder the schloky descriptions of these terrorists as morons and clowns is being put forth. It's because now the left can put it arms length and disavow solidarity while they stamp their feet with their fingers in their ears and yell lalalalalalalalalalalalalala the whole time.

As you can tell from my comments, I am most afraid of people like my friend's brother. White supremacists, extreme christian sects, far right wing radicals, the KKK, and the people who blow up abortion clinics. They are the biggest terrorist threat in this country.

Well considering the odds of me getting killed by the KKK vs a jihadist, I may as well worry about a planet killer asteroid as well. If you want to cite statistics of murders from the end of the 19th century to the Tet Offensive to make your point, by all means go ahead. But the last time I checked, since the 1970’s the majority of terrorist acts, hijackings, bombings, kidnappings and beheadings have been committed by Muslim males aged between 17 and 40. If you want to believe that Billy Joe Jim Bob and his cousins looking to ‘lynch a few darkies’ is the greatest threat to the US then I have to wonder if you’re paying attention.

"Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure"

It is disgusting. Like I said. If this is the standard we are applying, my friend's brother would have been in federal prison long ago.

Freder you are aware that this incident was initially foiled by a video clerk who informed the FBI about the video in which:

The unidentified clerk is being credited with tipping off authorities in January 2006 after one of the suspects asked him to transfer a video to DVD that showed 10 men shooting weapons at a firing range and calling for jihad, prosecutors said.

So if this standard bothers you so much, have you contacted the FBI and informed them that your brother's buddy is stockpiing weapons, expressing a desire to kill (insert whoever here)and providing video evidence to show it?

Seems to me the only reason you're upset is because these guys were caught and those white folk who scare you so much and walking free. Be part of the the solution and call the Feds and tell them of your concerns.

I think a foiled school shooting would be local news and even the VA Tech shooting should have been national news for at most 3 days. It was a terrible event with relatively little news value that was gruesomely exploited for entertainment purposes.

I think a foiled school shooting would be local news and even the VA Tech shooting should have been national news for at most 3 days. It was a terrible event with relatively little news value that was gruesomely exploited for entertainment purposes.

Hmmm....one guys takes out 32 people and that's a terrible event with relatively little news value

Freder: the situation you describe with your friends brother: have you given any thought to dropping an anonymous tip with BATF in order to stop these guys?

Do you seriously think the FBI doesn't know about these guys? Google Christian Identity. It's not like they are that secretive. You can be damn sure if they were Muslims they wouldn't get away with a tenth of the shit they do or say. Hell, they would come down on them for the IRS violations alone.

A few years ago post 911 I visted a city where another major Army base is located. (I won't say where.) I got lost and drove onto this equally enormous base right through a checkpoint going about 30-40 miles an hour.

You might have been driving through the training area or base property, but the cantonment areas are now all access controlled. If you don't know what cantonment is, pull out your dictionary.

It's Muslims who want to do these things, not Hindus, not Buddhists, not Christians, not even Freemasons.

What about the IRA (Catholic)? Tamil Tigers (Hindu)? KKK (Protestant Christian)? And have we already forgotten the communists and Nazis?

If you want to believe that Billy Joe Jim Bob and his cousins looking to ‘lynch a few darkies’ is the greatest threat to the US then I have to wonder if you’re paying attention.

As far as attacks inside the U.S., it most certainly is. The number of attacks by right wing terrorists is far greater and except for 9/11, so are the fatalities. In fact, the only other extremist Muslim attack on U.S. soil I can think of is the 1993 WTC bombing.

At the risk of being a bit argumentative, Doyle: Havent we done that in Afghanistan as well as Iraq? Are you seriously suggesting our presence in Afghanistan alone would NOT generate terrorist attacks? Even if we brought OBLs head back on a pike?

Freder: I havent got the remotest idea about what the FBI knows about the movement you describe--are you seriously asserting the know these guys have 50 cals and other automatic weapons and are not acting because they arent moslem? Serious question, because if thats so, I will be writing my congressman and senator and calling BATF myself.

Clearly, this plot is less absurd than the fake baby formula explosive plot -- after which we still can't take conditioner on planes -- or the florida martial artists attacking the Sears Tower plot. It is at most the third dumbest terrorist plot ever overemphasized by an administration wishing to change the news cycle.

have you given any thought to dropping an anonymous tip with BATF in order to stop these guys?

And every time the government takes on groups like these, you guys are the first to defend them and condemn the government as jackbooted thugs who are trampling on innocent peoples' rights to be left alone and exercise their god-given 2nd amendment rights. Just look at the reaction to Ruby Ridge and Waco.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to direct my previous questions to you in particular; I was responding to your post and added on a few other questions that were not directly related to anything you had written.

We are in Iraq as part of an offensive GWOT, and we have increased domestic security as part of a defensive GWOT.

I don't believe Bush went into Iraq as part of an "offensive GWOT." The advantages of having a pro-western, democratic state in the ME had been discussed in many different contexts before 9-11 (including for example the energy policy paper from the James Baker Institute for Public Policy that I recommended to you). Obviously the existence of a ME state friendly to the west (and strategically important because of its resources) also is of value in fighting terrorism globally, but I don't think the Saddam Hussein-terrorist "connection" was ever a serious consideration in the decision to invade and occupy Iraq. Rather, I think the grossly exaggerated link to terrorism was used cynically as cover to justify the invasion (as was the exaggerated stated concern for poor, suffering Iraqis).

The result of our invasion is that terrorism is on the rise globally, and terrorist attacks are a regular feature of life in Iraq. (Note that terrorist attacks on our troops are not counted as terrorism by the State Department report on worldwide terrorism.) Our relative geographical isolation makes terrorist attacks more difficult in America than in Europe, Asia or Africa. Of course, by stationing Americans in Iraq, we've provided attractive and relatively convenient targets for any and all terrorists. So in a certain sense, I suppose, our occupation of Iraq has evolved into an "offensive front" in the GWOT (as well as forcing us to act as referee in a civil war), but it's a battle that we don't appear to be winning. Worse still, I doubt that it's a winnable battle. I would have hoped that we'd choose our battles more wisely.

Although I opposed the invasion of Iraq, I'm willing to let Bush manage the war as he thinks best, as long as he accepts full responsibility for all aspects of the adventure. This includes death and injury of tens of thousands of American soldiers, death and injury of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, and of course, the total cost of the war. As part of accepting responsibility, Bush should be asking Americans to pay the cost of the war now, rather than cowardly passing this on to a future generation. This is just a small part of Bush's dishonesty about the war. Not only does he deny to the American public the reality of the situation in Iraq, he doesn't ask us to make the sacrifices required to pay for the battle. This reflects, IMO, the fact that he calculates that the American public is less willing to support his Iraq policy if asked to pay for it. But as administration insiders have admitted, politics trumps policy in Bush administration decisions.

Roger, I suspect we could make a lot of significant improvements in homeland security with the resources (funds, not troops) being wasted in Iraq.

Having said all this, I now await the daily ritual of being labeled a copperhead (and therefore a traitor). Tim? Fen?

Freder: I havent got the remotest idea about what the FBI knows about the movement you describe--are you seriously asserting the know these guys have 50 cals and other automatic weapons and are not acting because they arent moslem? Serious question, because if thats so, I will be writing my congressman and senator and calling BATF myself.

Absolutely. Google Christian Identity and you will find out all about them. Most of them don't pay any income tax either.

"And every time the government takes on groups like these, you guys are the first to defend them and condemn the government as jackbooted thugs who are trampling on innocent peoples' rights to be left alone and exercise their god-given 2nd amendment rights. Just look at the reaction to Ruby Ridge and Waco"

Who in the hell are "you guys?" No serious member of NRA or second amendment supporter advocates private ownership of heavy MGs or automatic weapons.

Having said all this, I now await the daily ritual of being labeled a copperhead (and therefore a traitor). Tim? Fen?

Nah, you haven't said anything I would attribute to BDS or Copperheads.

I don't think the Saddam Hussein-terrorist "connection" was ever a serious consideration in the decision to invade and occupy Iraq.

President Clinton: "reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals... predators of the twenty-first century...will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

Freder said: And every time the government takes on groups like these, you guys are the first to defend them and condemn the government as jackbooted thugs who are trampling on innocent peoples' rights to be left alone and exercise their god-given 2nd amendment rights. Just look at the reaction to Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Whose are these 'yous guys' you're referring to? I'm a registered Republican and after the Waco wackos fired on Federal agents killing some of them, I was wondering why the compound wasn't turned into ashes within the next 8 hours.

If you want to lump every conservative as a crazed white sumpremisct then don't let me get in your way of sterotyping because we know from you, that's a bad thing right? Not all Muslims are terrorists but all conservative GOP types are warmongering Ruby Ridge defenders.

Seems to me you're assuming a whole lot about the Feds and these Christian Identity guys. Why not inform your congressperson, make a call to the FBI or BATF just to be sure. Unless of course you're making this all up.

Doyle said:reducing the number of terrorist attacks would be easier if we hadn't invaded a Muslim country on false pretenses and decided to stay there indefinitely.

You mean easier like before 9/11 and the Cole, and the WTC in 1993 and the African embassies and oh never mind.

you KNOW the FBI is aware they possess automatic weapons and heavy MGs and have not acted.

I KNOW my friend has been to one of their compounds in Idaho, where he personally saw permanently emplaced loaded heavy machine guns that they did not bother to conceal from him (an outsider). He was there for his brother's wedding (he is actually married to the daughter of a leader of the movement). People were also walking around openly with military rifles (obviously he couldn't tell if they were semi or fully automatic).

I can only ASSUME that federal authorities are aware of this. I can also only assume that these people would not obtain the necessary federal permits to own these weapons legally as they consider the federal government illegitimate and controlled by Jews (it is a Zionist Occupation Government actually). I know my friend's brother won't even let his children use toothpaste because he considers it poison concocted by the Jews (or maybe some other group, I'm not quite sure). And don't even get him started on vaccinations.

Cyrus Pinkerton - If you believe that the plot had a good chance to succeed, and if it had succeeded it would have amounted to a significant hit, doesn't that suggest that we should be using more of our resources at home, improving our homeland defense and intelligence services rather than squandering them in Iraq?

It's now a wonderful catch-all of vacuous propagandizing for Lefties. Any problem in America could be, must be, solved - by the 120,000 combat troops now "squandered" in Iraq. While the remaining 2399/2400ths of our population of 300 million is clearly "powerless" - and must stand around with ourthumbs up our asses.

Lefties throw it out constantly, and don't seem to realize how stupid they sound.

"We wouldn't have had the spinach problem if we had people wasted being in Iraq looking at how clean our spinach is.""Who could ever imagine tornados or other natural disasters could occur during an armed conflict? How can we be overseas in any capacity, have a Navy even, when our children in uniform might have to clean up tornado debris for other children?""If we had the armed troops now in Iraq stationed on every university campus with full auto weapons and no regard for posse comitatus, those hapless infants in uniform could have saved the infant college students from Cho Seung-hui, for their mother's sake - at least until we ban all evil guns!"

"Global warming? Remember we have 120,000 troops in Iraq that we love so deeply...and they could solve global warming instead of murdering innocent Iraqis if it wasn't for Bush!"

to paraphrase roger said, that's a breathtaking assumption. You made a blanket statement that the Feds don't do anything since these guys are a Christian movement yet now say you simply assume they do.

You'll forgive me for saying your biases are peeking out a bit too much. Do the right thing and remove all doubt and contact the FBI/BATF. That is of course, if you sincerely believe these individuals are the greatest terrorist threat to this country.

Wonkette is a paradise of ignorance and frivolity, firedoglake a haven of hatred and stupidity.

I note that the same people who make light of a terrorist plot in the US designed to kill our soldiers as doomed to failure are the very same people who expend buckets of tears and ink decrying how vulnerable our soldiers in Iraq are and how utterly defenceless and doomed they are and how they have no chance of defeating the terrorists.

"However, this appears to be another case of a bunch of disillusioned friends with no particular intentions who were infiltrated by an FBI informant who became the ring leader and encouraged them to actually plan the attack. The informant is the one who offered to supply the AK's. I bet he is the one who dreamed up the idea of attacking Fort Dix too."

Freder, where did you get this information? I could not find any reference to this in the articles I have read. As you are making statements of fact, please back them up with a citation to a news article."

Ridicule can be a powerful tool if you're fighting against something. The trick in this case is to make the perpetrators look like morons

This is indeed a sound strategy, and one that we should pursue most earnestly. The terrorists are miles ahead of us in the propaganda game, thanks to the compliance and gullibility of what passes for 'news media' in this country.

Of course, there's a double standard at work: terrorists trying to kill Americans on American soil are portrayed as bumbling loons to downplay the threat. Terrorists trying to kill Americans on Iraqi soil are lionized as invincibly strong supernaturally wily indomitable fighters, to downplay our chance of succeeding there.

I note that the same people who make light of a terrorist plot in the US designed to kill our soldiers as doomed to failure are the very same people who expend buckets of tears and ink decrying how vulnerable our soldiers in Iraq are

Good point! If this foiled plot wasn't really a grave threat to Fort Dix, how can these peaceniks claim that the soldiers getting killed in Iraq are, in fact, getting killed?

If you believe that the plot had a good chance to succeed, and if it had succeeded it would have amounted to a significant hit, doesn't that suggest that we should be using more of our resources at home, improving our homeland defense and intelligence

...

What do you think stopped this attack? The very homeland intelligence you claim is being neglected in favor of Iraq. Oh and also, that very 'domestic spying' that the Democrats like to oppose bitterly.

Intelligence is the way to combat domestic terror cells. There is no possible way you can secure an entire country from their attacks.

Terrorists will *always* be able to devise plots that have a good chance of succeeding and that will cause a lot of death if they succeed - our only hope is to find out about them before they happen and stop them.

Do the right thing and remove all doubt and contact the FBI/BATF. That is of course, if you sincerely believe these individuals are the greatest terrorist threat to this country.

Ah, but you see Hoosier, maybe this is where I side with "yous guys" more than you think. Jon (my friend's brother) is really in his heart a decent guy. Before he got caught up in this cult, he was the sweetest guy alive. He got along with everybody and was generous to a fault. Even now, he is gentle and kind until some perceived evil sets him off and then it is like some robot takes over his mind. He just spouts off all this nonsense like he has memorized it by rote and doesn't even believe it himself. It is actually kind of scary and very sad. It is very easy to see how they convince people to become suicide bombers.

But how do you deal with these groups? Pushing them, harassing them, only makes them hate the government more and makes them even more paranoid. Better to let them spew their hate, play with their guns, and just keep an eye on them. To do more just makes them more dangerous.

And busting (and most likely committing a huge amount of agency resources) a group of paintball playing pizza delivery guys who even the government admits had absolutely no connection to that group advances that goal how?

Grow up. What sort of connection are you looking for? Autographed photographs of Osama Bin Laden? Offical Al Qaida Fan Club cards in their wallets?

How you can say that one group of religiously motivated muslims plotting to kill US citizens has absolutely no connection to another group of religiously motivated muslims plotting to kill US citizens is laughably absurd.

If we grant the Bush administration's patently false premise that we invaded Iraq to get at the terrorists, it's fair to question the extent to which having troops in Iraq actually protects us at home.

Can anyone explain to me how a sleeper cell in Michigan or London or Indonesia is in any way impeded by our troop presence in Iraq?

President Clinton: "reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals...

Fen, I don't think Clinton was consulted about the decision to invade Iraq. My point is that those who decided to invade Iraq certainly considered WMD the primary reason for the war. Don't you agree with that?

But how do you deal with these groups? Pushing them, harassing them, only makes them hate the US more and makes them even more paranoid. Better to let them spew their hate, play with their box cutters, take their flying lessons, and just keep an eye on them. To do more just makes them more dangerous.

Problem with the 9/11 hijackers is that no one was keeping an eye on them even when Condi Rice was presented with a PDB entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the U.S."

Speaking of which. I would look for some really bad news to be released by the White House this Friday. I would imagine that is why this arrest was announced yesterday. There is some big and bad news they are preparing to release on Friday that they want a distraction from.

"Actually, what I should have said, is I HOPE federal authorities are aware of this"

Not a problem, Freder: I will be calling the BATF with this website information and your concerns--I will do it because I am a retired commissioned officer who took an oath of service to the constitution of the united states.

The beauty of the internet is that all of this in now documented including your IPs, and should these guys have the arsenal you believe them to have, I as both an officer and a citizen have a duty to report this and I will sleep better at night.

And you, Freder, self described turd in the punchbowl you are, have failed in your duty as a citizen, but you sit idly by, spewing sturm und drang, with evil in front of you, and do nothing.

Its time to drain the punchbowl, you overbearing supercilious, cowardly ass.

But how do you deal with these groups? Pushing them, harassing them, only makes them hate the government more and makes them even more paranoid. Better to let them spew their hate, play with their guns, and just keep an eye on them. To do more just makes them more dangerous.

Whoa! Wait! Allow me to retort. You said that it was guys like these who are responsible for 5000 some killings, the 2nd largest terrorist act in this country and as you stated "the greatest terrorist threat to this country". Yet now you're backpedaling.

Ah, but you see Hoosier, maybe this is where I side with "yous guys" more than you think.

Again, I ain't one of 'those guys'.

Jon (my friend's brother) is really in his heart a decent guy.

Except for the whole Jew hating thing and loading up on illegal guns.

Before he got caught up in this cult, he was the sweetest guy alive.

So were a lot of guys in the SS.

Even now, he is gentle and kind until some perceived evil sets him off and then it is like some robot takes over his mind.

Ok so let me get this straight, these are the kind of guys who scare you, greatest terrorist threat and all yet are simply docile bunnies until they get pissed off.

Freder, no disrespect but you're either making this up as you go or are completely out to lunch. You make statements about the Ft. Dix plot which are completely unfounded, claim that white christian groups are more dangerous to American than Muslim extremists, use your friend's brother as an example and when called on it, essentially state that these guys aren't so bad unless you scare em.

I'll be in the Sandpoint, Idaho area at the end of the month. I've been there many times before, and have seen things that are fairly consistent with what Freder is reporting. However, I'm not a firearms expert so I can't comment on the identity of the weaponry.

HDHouse rambles: What speaks more "volumes" here is that someone could disguise himself as a pizza delivery person and gain immediate access to a military installation

I'm guessing you've never been withing spit range of a military installation.

Yes, there is security, but we live in an open society, and until the Islamo-morons arrived, military installations have managed to survive just fine without being under a lock down. Now that the Islamo-morons are with us, times have changed. Luckily for the families of the soldiers who would have been driving the Humvee targets, we get to change our ways before the fact.

Try visiting one of the military academies. You get on by just showing a picture id. Of course, folks like HDHouse probably would not be caught dead on the grounds of a military academy. It would force him/er to honor those who've made a decision at a young age to commit to the defense of their country.

Freder - However, this appears to be another case of a bunch of disillusioned friends with no particular intentions who were infiltrated by an FBI informant who became the ring leader and encouraged them to actually plan the attack.

Right, it's all the bad informant's fault that innocent people of the Religion of Peace that believe they should kill masses of Americans are somehow duped by the evil FBI into actually working to kill masses of Americans. Why, such an informant could just as easily convince Jews in a synogogue or a Lions Club or black rap fans to do the same!!!

And of course, Freder has to mention his Islamoid pals aren't the real danger....Hollywood has informed him it is the White NeoNazis, KKK that have killed nearly nobody in long time are the real danger vs. his beloved Jihadis that have butchered almost 9 million Hindis, Christians, and moderate Muslims since the mid-60s.

Freder - White supremacists, extreme christian sects, far right wing radicals, the KKK, and the people who blow up abortion clinics. They are the biggest terrorist threat in this country. Always have been.

Yeah, right Freder! Your advice then is to ignore any kindly misled noble Jihadis and focus on the "dangerous, dangerous" right wing white people as the true menace! We saw how bad they were when Sarkozy won. Cars burning, gas bombs, police attacked, hundreds arrested on terroristic violence. Just as Royal warned!

****************Freder, minimizing any Jihadists or Salafist/Wahabbi enablers outside AQ -And busting (and most likely committing a huge amount of agency resources) a group of paintball playing pizza delivery guys who even the government admits had absolutely no connection to that group (AQ) advances that goal how?

If you weren't such an enemy lover, you would understand radical Islam is an ideology. Not one terrorist group headed by one guy who if caught or killed will "magically" end Islamic terror. Besides AQ, there are 78 other organized radical Islamic groups that use terror. There are millions of potential "spontaneous" Jihadis in the West that occasionally just kill or bomb or drive cars into crowds of people because they were "inspired" to do so.

I call Freder a Copperhead because he is a committed defender of Islamists as "not the real problem", and talks how we should stop fighting them and maximize their rights and liberties so they will love us instead of hate us.

In that sense he is very much like the Copperheads, who thought Lincoln was the real problem, not the Confederate soldiers killing Union troops, and who advocated an end to war "at any price, including slavery continuing" and constantly complining (when not locked up as seditious traitors) about the "precious civil liberties" of the Confederates...*****************************"The only reason these terrorists were discovered was because a minimum wage clerk making a copy of their film footage tipped off authorities."

Cyrus - Again, if you believe this, there is something seriously wrong with Bush's homeland security.

Why, Cyrus? Why do you have a problem with citizens alert to the radical Muslim menace being the 1st line of defense in reporting suspicious activity by Muslims? Should they be sued and belittled when they see behavior or action that appears threatening and report it? Is our nation's security everybody's job, or just the cops and paid government employee's job?

******************Radar - Not sure what it would be in the short term, but I've always thought that if a handful of attacks like this were 'successful', that the repercussions for the Muslim community (domestic and international) would be pretty drastic and non-linear in nature. I don't know how to predict the timing of or trigger for this 'tipping point' but I have no doubt that it exists.

There are 500,000 targets in the USA. You cannot defend them all. Even trying to - with a few armed guards - would be little deterrent to a squad of 6-12 armed Muslims on a suicide mission determined to - say - do another Beslan.

Lefties who cry out for more cops and for the 120,000 combat troops "wasted in Iraq" when they could be "protecting the children at bus stops and malls and universities" are clueless about the impossibility of secure defenses in an open country.

That leaves us with what Radar said - a tipping point where people understand the futility of pure defense and "law enforcement authorities" and seek stronger, non-linear deterrent measures against enemy Islamoids and their enemy-loving supporters. Europe appears closer to that tipping point than we are.

And every time the government takes on groups like these, you guys are the first to defend them and condemn the government as jackbooted thugs who are trampling on innocent peoples' rights to be left alone and exercise their god-given 2nd amendment rights. Just look at the reaction to Ruby Ridge and Waco.

Ironic. Just *imagine* the outcry if the US military 'took on' terrorists in Iraq or Afghanistan like they 'took on' the nuts at Waco.

The lefty outrage at the 'excessive brutality' and 'callous disregard for life' in the latter cases would be matched only by their disinterest in the former. But of course, the victims at Waco and Ruby Ridge didn't belong to any special 'protected groups'.

Freder, no disrespect but you're either making this up as you go or are completely out to lunch.

Well no, Hoosier, what would you have me do? This is the brother of one of my best friends (he is more like a brother than a friend). His family is like my second family. Everyone else in his family is one hundred percent absolutely whitebread suburban normal living in the boring upper middle class suburbs of Chicago. They are mortified by what Jon has become yet try and maintain a normal relationship with him.

And the facts are there, from the Oklahoma City bombing to abortion clinics to the Olympic Park bombings, the vast majority of terrorist attacks that take place in this country are carried out by far right wing extremists that often ascribe to fundamentalist Christian beliefs.

If you look at the Muslim "terrorists" that have been busted after 9/11 and are in some cases are sitting in jail (and note that none have actually gone to trial), they don't even approach the level of hatred, sophistication, or even access to weapons that literally hundreds of these "Christian" groups do. Many of them have websites where they openly advocate the destruction of the U.S. government and violence against minority groups. Yet we pretend that these groups of disaffected Albanians are some existential threat while we allow thousands of white "Christians" who are waiting with baited breath for the start of a race war and the destruction of ZOG to go about their business.

I honestly don't know what to do about either group. The FBI can't wipe out an entire religious group founded on the proposition that all non-Europeans aren't even human and should be wiped from the face of the earth. Attempting to do so will only feed their paranoia and probably lead to certain bloodshed. And there are certainly muslim jihadists out to get us. But chasing every group of immigrants who bitches about Americans and infiltrating them with an informant who then goads them into plotting elaborate and fantastical attacks hardly makes us safer either.

The only reason these terrorists were discovered was because a minimum wage clerk making a copy of their film footage tipped off authorities.

I wrote this:

Again, if you believe this, there is something seriously wrong with Bush's homeland security.

Cedarford then wrote:

Why, Cyrus? Why do you have a problem with citizens alert to the radical Muslim menace being the 1st line of defense in reporting suspicious activity by Muslims? Should they be sued and belittled when they see behavior or action that appears threatening and report it? Is our nation's security everybody's job, or just the cops and paid government employee's job?

I don't have a problem with citizens being alert to terrorist threats. I can't imagine how you read that nonsense into what I wrote. Try reading what I wrote again and think about it.

Now, if you read the original post that I was responding to, you'll see the author identified the clerk as the LAST line of defense, not the first line of defense (i.e., "the only reason these terrorists were discovered ..."). Now, I'll ask you the same question I asked originally: If you believe the terrorists failed ONLY because of the actions of a clerk, doesn't that suggest there is something seriously wrong with Bush's homeland defense?

As far as the rest of your post is concerned, it's based on a false premise. You clearly misread or misunderstood my comments.

But chasing every group of immigrants who bitches about Americans and infiltrating them with an informant who then goads them into plotting elaborate and fantastical attacks hardly makes us safer either.

Sure it does. You're just complaining that the government is possibly being overzealous.

I have *zero problem* with an informant turning these people in.

Even *if* he did the goading (which I doubt) I absolutely applaud the arresting of people who only need a bit of goading to be willing to go out and gun down US citizens.

It's not like there's a lack of crazed muslim imams out there to do the goading, should an FBI informant not happen to be around.

If you believe the terrorists failed ONLY because of the actions of a clerk, doesn't that suggest there is something seriously wrong with Bush's homeland defense?

Not at all. Unless you are suggesting that the FBI plant informants in every single Muslim household in America, the only other option is for everyday citizens to alert the authorities when they see something suspicious.

Terrorist plots are ONLY thwarted when you tipped off about them in advance, and in many situations, the only folks who will be in a position to know, are the every day John and Jane Doe.

Of course, then you have the terrorist propganda tool CAIR out trying to sue citizens for being vigilant and watchful, so who knows how long that will even be an option for us.

For those wanting to get more actively involved in the war on terror including right wing terrorists who, as Freder reminds us are the real threats, go to the BATF website, find the regional office, and send an email. I just did with this url; its really quite simple. There are also numerous tip lines.

I think the US needs to set up internment camps for the Moslems. Seriously - this is getting way out of hand. Always there seems to be 2-3 out of 5 Moslems unhappy with the US. Why let them in? Why not kick out the ones already in here? Internment camp seriously sounds like the best solution. Just round'em up in bunches and keep a tight noose. Then all they'll be able to blow up is one tiny hut in that camp. Enough with Moslems in this country. Go away and Barack Hussein Obama follow them too!

Well no, Hoosier, what would you have me do? This is the brother of one of my best friends (he is more like a brother than a friend). His family is like my second family.

Freder all I am saying is if you think these guys are the greatest terrorist threat the country faces then despite your personal relationship, you should be considrerd duty bound to report them. To do nothing only diminishes any credibility you have to discuss perceived terrorist threats.

And the facts are there, from the Oklahoma City bombing to abortion clinics to the Olympic Park bombings, the vast majority of terrorist attacks that take place in this country are carried out by far right wing extremists that often ascribe to fundamentalist Christian beliefs.

Ok so you continue to make this claim yet refuse to be proactive and notify the FBI that these individuals who you have personal knowledge of, are a potential threat.

Yet we pretend that these groups of disaffected Albanians are some existential threat while we allow thousands of white "Christians" who are waiting with baited breath for the start of a race war and the destruction of ZOG to go about their business.

Again, you have firsthand knowledge of the whereabouts, weaponry and potential destructive ability of these guys yet all you do is tell this board how bad these guys are.

Attempting to do so will only feed their paranoia and probably lead to certain bloodshed. And there are certainly muslim jihadists out to get us.

So you're position is do nothing and hope they don't too uppity right?

But chasing every group of immigrants who bitches about Americans and infiltrating them with an informant who then goads them into plotting elaborate and fantastical attacks hardly makes us safer either.

Ok let me ask you this. If you overhear 5 people, say in a Starbucks talking about procuring some heavy weaponry and going to the Mall to shoot up the place, would you inform the police and hope they investigate or simply hope the police know but won't do anything to 'goad them.' Because that is pretty much what you are saying now.

The compound was filled with innocent little children. Who are dead now. Good job, Janet Reno. *spit*

AND she had advisors from Army NBC that warned her children's lungs are too small to handle the CS gas - they would suffocate. But she went ahead and did it anyway, because the standoff was making Clinton look "weak".

Freder all I am saying is if you think these guys are the greatest terrorist threat the country faces then despite your personal relationship, you should be considrerd duty bound to report them.

Well hoosier, what do I know? All I know first hand is hearsay from what my friend told me and my own research on the internet about christian identity (and believe me there are some disgusting websites out there). And then I have listened to the racist and paranoid nonsense Jon spouts (how fluoride toothpaste is poison which the Jews apparently invented to slowly poison white children, to what end I don't quite know).

So what exactly am I supposed to tell the FBI? My friend's brother is a racist loon? There are lots of racist and violent websites on the internet? These Christian Identity nuts are somebody you should check out?

FDR put the Japanese in internment camps. Was that a violation of the constitution?

While the Supreme Court did indeed find the internment constitutional, the government deliberately distorted the facts that supported the justification for internment. Regardless, the reasoning of the court was probably one of the worst cases ever decided by the Court. It is unlikely that sixty years later it would be upheld, especially if the criteria for internment was adherence to a religion.

Well hoosier, what do I know? All I know first hand is hearsay from what my friend told me and my own research on the internet about christian identity

Freder, you were the one who claimed that these right wing Christian groups were the greatest threat to the country. You specifically refer to a group your friend's brother is involved with. I am simply pointing out that you're the one making the threat assessment and then stating, well I suppose there's not much we can do about it and probably shouldn't so as not to upset them.

I'm sorry if I find that assessment completely shocking.

You might be suprised to know that these groups probably have been infitrated by the Feds? Did you ever assume that perhaps these guys talk a good deal but when presented with the opportunity to make good on thier threats for violence lack the testicular fortitude to actually carry them out?

While the Supreme Court did indeed find the internment constitutional, the government deliberately distorted the facts that supported the justification for internment.

So if the constitution didn't prevent one group of people from being placed in internment camps, what makes you think it's going to prevent a second group of people from being placed in internment camps?

Or is your position that the Bush administration is less likely to misrepresent the facts than FDR's administration?

Most of what I know of their presence and activities is what I learn from the internet, which is a result of my friend's brother being active in the group. Even my friend has only been out to the compound in Idaho just the one time.

Fen, I don't think Clinton was consulted about the decision to invade Iraq.

You claim the Bush administration grossly exaggerated link to terrorism. Yet, Clinton's administration said the same things Bush did. Which of these links was exaggerated?

Clinton Justice Department [indictment of OBL]: "Al-Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering [Clinton]: "We see evidence that we think is quite clear on contacts between Sudan and Iraq. In fact, al Shifa officials, early in the company's history, we believe were in with Iraqi individuals associated with Iraq's VX program."

U.N. Ambassador Bill Richardson: ".."direct evidence of ties between Osama bin Laden and Sudan's Military Industrial Corporation.... You combine that with Sudan support for terrorism, their connections with Iraq on VX, and you combine that, also, with the chemical precursor issue, and Sudan's leadership support for Osama bin Laden, and you've got a pretty clear-cut case."

Sandy Berger: "[we] had physical evidence indicating that al Shifa was the site of chemical weapons activity... Other products were made at al Shifa... But we have seen such dual-use plants before -- in Iraq. And, indeed, we have information that Iraq has assisted chemical weapons activity in Sudan."

Washington Post: "[Richard] Clarke said U.S. intelligence does not know how much of the substance was produced at al Shifa or what happened to it. But he said that intelligence exists linking bin Laden to al Shifa's current and past operators, the Iraqi nerve gas experts, and the National Islamic Front in Sudan."

Clinton Defense Secretary, William Cohen, at 9-11 commission: "confirmed the associated between Iraq and Sudan in testimony before the 9/11 commission" Hayes writes.

New York Times: [translation of Iraqi doc states] "cooperation between the two organizations should be allowed to develop freely through discussion and agreement." [Doc has been] "authenticated by the U.S. government [Clinton administration]"

"Taken together with other evidence of the close relationship between al-Qaeda and the Sudanese government, the information in the Times article makes it less likely that Iraq and al Qaeda were unwitting allies," Hayes writes.

1998 request by Iraq to Al Queda to have UBL moved to Iraq for his protection.... Iraqi embassies around the world caught making frequent calls to Al Queda affiliate/branch groups...Iraqi list of IIS agents who are described as "collaborators." On page 14, the report states that among the collaborators is "the Saudi Osama bin Laden."...request from bin Laden that Iraq begin joint operations against foreign forces in Saudi Arabia... Iraqi document itself states that "cooperation between the two organizations should be allowed to develop freely through discussion and agreement... former director of operations for Iraqi intelligence Directorate 4 met with Mr. bin Laden on Feb. 19, 1995... Tenet reported, "We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." He added that Iraq and al Qaeda "have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression."... Tenet went on to warn, "We have credible reporting that al-Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities... The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al-Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs."...Iraqi intelligence agents met with [Usama] bin Laden, the head of Al Qaeda in Sudan."... Saddam gave safe haven to Al Qaeda associate Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.... Saddam and bin Laden reached an understanding that al-Qaida would no longer support activities against Baghdad... bin Laden met with a senior Iraqi intelligence official in Khartoum and later met the director of the Iraqi intelligence service... Saddam sent his agents to Afghanistan sometime in the mid-1990s to provide training to al-Qaida members on document forgery... bin Laden and his top deputy in Afghanistan, deceased al-Qaida leader Muhammad Atif, did not believe that al-Qaida labs in Afghanistan were capable enough to manufacture these chemical or biological agents. They needed to go somewhere else. They had to look outside of Afghanistan for help. Where did they go? Where did they look? They went to Iraq... Iraq offering chemical or biological weapons training for two al-Qaida associates beginning in December 2000... Abdallah al-Iraqi had been sent to Iraq several times between 1997 and 2000 for help in acquiring poisons and gasses... LtCol in the Saddam Fedayeen, Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, attended the key planning meeting of the Sept. 11 plotters... Saddam dispatched one of his top intelligence operatives, Faruq Hijazi, to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden... intelligence tying Saddam's VX nerve gas program to a suspected al Qaeda front company in Sudan.

"Speaking of Ansar al Islam, the al Qaeda-linked terrorist group that operated in northern Iraq, the former high-ranking military intelligence officer says: "There is no question about the fact that AI had reach into Baghdad. There was an intelligence connection between that group and the regime, a financial connection between that group and the regime, and there was an equipment connection. It may have been the case that the IIS [Iraqi Intelligence Service] support for AI was meant to operate against the [anti-Saddam] Kurds. But there is no question IIS was supporting AI."

http://www.floppingaces.net/saddam-documents/

"Al-Shamari also told me that the links between Saddam's regime and the al Qaeda network went beyond Ansar al Islam. He explained in considerable detail that Saddam actually ordered Abu Wael to organize foreign fighters from outside Iraq to join Ansar. Al-Shamari estimated that some 150 foreign fighters were imported from al Qaeda clusters in Jordan, Turkey, Syria, Yemen, Egypt, and Lebanon to fight with Ansar al Islam's Kurdish fighters.

Al-Shamari said that importing foreign fighters to train in Iraq was part of his job in the Mukhabarat. The fighters trained in Salman Pak, a facility located some 20 miles southeast of Baghdad. He said that he had personal knowledge of 500 fighters that came through Salman Pak dating back to the late 1990s; they trained in "urban combat, explosives, and car bombs." This account agrees with a White House Background Paper on Iraq dated September 12, 2002, which cited the "highly secret terrorist training facility in Iraq known as Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations."

Abu Wael also sent money to the aforementioned al Qaeda affiliates, and to other groups that "worked against the United States." Abu Wael dispensed most of the funds himself, al-Shamari said, but there was also some cooperation with Abu Musab al Zarqawi"

Tenet: "During the mid-1990s, Sudanese Islamic Front Leader Hasan al-Turabi reportedly served as a conduit for Bin Ladin between Iraq and Iran. Turabi in this period was trying to become the centerpiece of the Sunni extremist world. He was hosting conferences and facilitating the travel of North Africans to Hezbollah training camps in the Bekaa Valley, in Lebanon. There was concern that common interests may have existed in this period between Iraq, Bin Ladin, and the Sudanese, particularly with regard to the production of chemical weapons. The reports we evaluated told us of high-level Iraqi intelligence service contacts with Bin Ladin himself, though we never knew the outcome of these contacts. [Emphasis added]

My point is that those who decided to invade Iraq certainly considered WMD the primary reason for the war. Don't you agree with that?

No. There were several reasons stated for liberating Iraq. WMD programs were certainly one of them, but the MSM gave it more focus than it deserved, because it was sexier for ratings.

Perhaps you are thinking of Clinton's Iraqi Liberation Act?

/begins

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Congress makes the following findings:

(1) On September 22, 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, starting an 8 year war in which Iraq employed chemical weapons against Iranian troops and ballistic missiles against Iranian cities.

(2) In February 1988, Iraq forcibly relocated Kurdish civilians from their home villages in the Anfal campaign, killing an estimated 50,000 to 180,000 Kurds.

(3) On March 16, 1988, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iraqi Kurdish civilian opponents in the town of Halabja, killing an estimated 5,000 Kurds and causing numerous birth defects that affect the town today.

(4) On August 2, 1990, Iraq invaded and began a 7 month occupation of Kuwait, killing and committing numerous abuses against Kuwaiti civilians, and setting Kuwait's oil wells ablaze upon retreat.

(5) Hostilities in Operation Desert Storm ended on February 28, 1991, and Iraq subsequently accepted the ceasefire conditions specified in United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (April 3, 1991) requiring Iraq, among other things, to disclose fully and permit the dismantlement of its weapons of mass destruction programs and submit to long-term monitoring and verification of such dismantlement.

(6) In April 1993, Iraq orchestrated a failed plot to assassinate former President George Bush during his April 14-16, 1993, visit to Kuwait.

(7) In October 1994, Iraq moved 80,000 troops to areas near the border with Kuwait, posing an imminent threat of a renewed invasion of or attack against Kuwait.

(8) On August 31, 1996, Iraq suppressed many of its opponents by helping one Kurdish faction capture Irbil, the seat of the Kurdish regional government.

(9) Since March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs.

(10) On August 5, 1998, Iraq ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, and subsequently threatened to end long-term monitoring activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency and UNSCOM.

(11) On August 14, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-235, which declared that `the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations.'.

(12) On May 1, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-174, which made $5,000,000 available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition for such activities as organization, training, communication and dissemination of information, developing and implementing agreements among opposition groups, compiling information to support the indictment of Iraqi officials for war crimes, and for related purposes.

SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE CONGRESS REGARDING UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD IRAQ.

It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime

I know that the facts say that most terrorist acts in this country are performed by right wing groups

And you know of a right wing group heavily arming itself and talking of committing terrorist acts.

Why don't you alert the authorities? Is it because you don't *actually* believe that right wing groups are likely to commit terrorism or just that you don't care about saving the lives of your fellow citizens?

As you can tell from my comments, I am most afraid of people like my friend's brother. White supremacists, extreme christian sects, far right wing radicals, the KKK, and the people who blow up abortion clinics. They are the biggest terrorist threat in this country. Always have been.

and yet, he insists he shouldn't alert the authorities to this group, which is heavily armed, speaking of committing crimes, and the greatest danger America faces today.

Freder: You are either a liar or a coward.

Either in your heart you don't actually believe this group will do *anything* or you think they *are* dangerous and choose not to get involved.

So if the constitution didn't prevent one group of people from being placed in internment camps, what makes you think it's going to prevent a second group of people from being placed in internment camps?

The constitutional arguments presented then wouldn't fly today (remember in the 1940s, Jim Crow laws were legal, immigration laws discriminated based on race, etc.). Internment of a group based on race or religion would simply be prime facia illegal under current constitutional law.

So are you saying I should move out to Colorado, become a member of this church, see if they are planning attacks, and then become an informant for the FBI?

Apparently you are not very good at grasping implications.

So, I'll fall back on simple yes/no questions

(a) Did you approve of the method of the Waco attack?(b) Would you approve of a similar method of combatting suspected terrorists? (Burning down homes containing women and children)(c) Do you believe your friend's brother and the group he is involved in are actually dangerous and actually pose a threat to this country?

I loved one astute question asked in the Democrats candidate debate that tangentially relates to the Ft Dix question.The Democrats have a mindset of attempting to minimize the threat of "hapless, blundering" Muslim terrorists, while insisting that no threat abroad is worth going after (except one guy they have made into Moby Dick) and the solution is "more government employees defending our children at home instead of letting our other children in uniform die "senselessly" killing Islamoids abroad.

The question was "Two Yemeni ships detonate 1 mile offshore and take out two major cities. What is your response as President?"

You could see the deer in the headlight look. It wrecked their meme about "hundreds of thousands of heroes" inspecting every piece of cargo to keep us all safe here at home instead of being wasted fighting the enemy overseas...

By presenting a case that negated all the cargo inspectors...just as any thinking Muslim had already concluded that any WMD would have to be detonated once it arrived in a major US target rather than wait for customs..By negating the idiotic Lefty argument that all such American problems could be avoided if only the 1/2400th of the US population now killing Islamoids in Iraq was "doing something at home, everything in fact - for the children, the children....!!"

Obama started and blew it by saying he would of course focus on the "victims", with legions of nurturing "caregivers" rushing to provide for survivor's needs. The next joker went law enforcement on the need to "do a good criminal investigation". Nothing about the response to the enemy. Only HIllary was on her game. She said she would use the full measure and might of the US military to go after the perps.

Meaning...(holds breath) Hillary actually thinks that America may have to do something about barbarous Muslim radicals outside the USA!! Obama of course was smart enough to realize that his "I would have nurturing caregivers handle it" argument sounded downright milksoppish and pacifist and came back with a tougher response than I'd be the Healer.....by saying he too would think of the military if we were attacked when HE was President.

Honestly, the only one I think showed they had good instincts that night was Hillary, and she has unfortunately joined the hard Left on certain "terrorist rights" causes.

Freder: And the facts are there, from the Oklahoma City bombing to abortion clinics to the Olympic Park bombings, the vast majority of terrorist attacks that take place in this country are carried out by far right wing extremists that often ascribe to fundamentalist Christian beliefs.

The FBI says, according to CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Violent animal rights extremists and eco-terrorists now pose one of the most serious terrorism threats to the nation, top federal law enforcement officials said Wednesday.

Senior officials from the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms (ATF) and Explosives told a Senate panel of their growing concern over these groups.

Of particular concern are the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF).

John Lewis, the FBI's deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, said animal and environmental rights extremists have claimed credit for more than 1,200 criminal incidents since 1990. The FBI has 150 pending investigations associated with animal rights or eco-terrorist activities, and ATF officials say they have opened 58 investigations in the past six years related to violence attributed to the ELF and ALF.

In the same period violence from groups like the Ku Klux Klan and anti-abortion extremists have declined, Lewis said.

I guess you forgot about eco-terrorists and animal rights terrorists because a lot of them are left wing? Seems to me there are sick people who plot terrorist violence on the far left and far right.

I don't think everyone who cares about the environment or animals should be painted as associated with extremist, violent groups, nor do I think everyone who thinks Waco was a mishandled disaster that resulted in the deaths of something like 21 children should be painted as associated with Timothy McVeigh. Who is holding up McVeigh as a hero?

And what I really don't understand is someone acting like these brands of domestic terrorism over abortion, environmentalism, etc., is a bigger threat than Islamist terrorism. There is a huge international network behind Islamist terrorism, including governments. This is why we can treat environmental and anti-abortion type terrorist incidents as crimes, whereas Islamist terrorism is war.

a) No, I think the final assault was poorly planned and executed. Although the implication of b) is that you think that the government deliberately burned down the buildings. I don't think that is accurate. In fact wasn't it shown that the defenders started the fires?

So, of course the answer to b) is no.

c) The particular group Jon is in? No. From what my friend tells me, they obviously have the capability to carry out a serious attack if they were so inclined. So I think they are not an immediate danger (except unfortunately to the children in their group) unless someone actually tried to take away their toys. But do I think they should be taken seriously and watched carefully? You bet your ass I do.

Yes--the existence of WMDs was a big justification, but not the only justification, for the invasion. Apropos of that,

"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."

Former President Clinton During an interview on CNN's "Larry King Live" July 22, 2003

It is also my understanding that biological and chemical weapons components, plans, etc. have been found in Iraq, just not in the quantities that it was believed--by pretty nearly everyone in 2002 and 2003--were there.

However, I find it odd that you think the greatest threat to America today is a group that is "not an immediate danger" when there *are* groups that are an immediate danger flying planes into buildings, kidnapping civilians and sawing off their heads, plotting to attack US army installations in NJ, etc.

And groups like this *do* need to be watched: If people have the capability of doing great harm, and talk loudly of the great harm they are going to do, I think we should take them at their word.

And as far as Waco goes, not only is it very likely was the government responsible for the fires, but IIRC, they were responsible for the deaths of some of the agents as well (good old friendly fire)

For all their hoarded weaponry, (And the allegations far outstripped the actual stockpiles) the branch davidians actually made a pretty poor showing.

Mind you, Koresh definitely appears to have been nuts and if even a quarter of the allegations against him were true, an investigation was in order.

"It doesn't matter to me whether I get locked up, arrested or get taken away," a suspect identified as Serdar Tatar said in another recorded conversation. "Or I die, it doesn't matter. I'm doing it in the name of Allah."

Another suspect, Eljvir Duka, was recorded saying: "In the end, when it comes to defending your religion, when someone is trying attacks your religion, your way of life, then you go jihad."

Just pointing out with their own words that the threat of law enforcement and "strict criminal justice" means absolutely nothing to these guys - and those that see the solution to radical Islamists in courts, lawyers, cops, and "More civil liberties" for enemy combatants are deluding themselves.

******************

Fen, sorry, I mostly agree with you, but your 6-page long piece of cut' n' paste SPAM was a bit much. I could do a 23-page long piece of borrowed SPAM on quotes of other nations leaders and yet more democrats who thought years ago that Iraq was a danger that had to be handled and "nation-built", but I don't think Althouse's blog, or her other posters deserves the copied, ideological SPAM filling up her threads.

You like it, just link it....

I trust any poster Ann allows to post here could readily visit Right-wing or Left-wing sites and import thousands of pages of stuff matching their views and slap it up here, but that's not the point. We know the capacity exists to copy, cut, and paste the extensive observations and opinions of others you've read.Tell us what you think.

Here is the text of the email I sent to BATF:"I am forwarding you a website comment thread : http://althouse.blogspot.com/2007/05/making-light-of-fort-dix-terror-plot.html#comments

I participate on this web blog and one of the participants on this site made what I consider to be serious allegations that some members of the Christian Identity Movement possess “heavy MGs and automatic weapons.” The thread length is considerable, and the information can be seen by reading down the thread.

I am a retired army LTC and pressed the person on the thread about his information. It is at best double hearsay, but I take any thread of automatic weapons, including 50 caliber MGs seriously.

I am forwarding this information on to use as you see fit. You may call me at the contact numbers below.

When it comes to the attack on the com-pound in Waco, I have never understood why the feds didn't just pick up Koresh in Waco. He was known to go there for shopping every week with just a couple of people and in his own truck. Why not just pick him up there and not kill all those people at the compound. The whole mess was unnecessary in the first place and could have been averted by the feds.

As to the information that AQ was going to attack the US, the info as we have seen in the 9/11 report was that AQ was going to attack in the near future at some big city. How would you process that information and know that on 9/11 AQ was going to attack the WTC and the Pentagon using box cutters on flight 93, flight whatever it was and the other flight and only those flights. After all NYC is full of good places to attack (UN, WTC, Empire State building, Times Square, Wall Street, Madison Ave, St Patrick's Cathedral/Rockefeller Center, Lincoln Center, the tunnels and bridges, etc) and there are over 4000 flights per day just into LGA. Which one are you going to pick and for sure on which day. That bit of information was useless then and is useless now. If the Clinton AG and her staff had not pushed the wall between the FBI and the intelligence community, then possibly the connection between the AQ who were going to attack and when it would happen could have been made. That was the biggest problem then.

Could you be more specific re "sacrifices"? Are you advocating taxes tied to the war, the reinstating the draft?

Fen, I believe in having taxes linked to spending, and that includes spending on wars. If we aren't willing to pay for it, we shouldn't spend on it. (And I refuse to vote for ANY politician who promises to accomplish some goal beyond the length of his term, e.g., "I'll balance the budget in 10 years.")

You know that I oppose the war, and I have from the beginning. But, once the decision is made, I think it is the responsibility of ALL Americans to pull together and share in the sacrifice, and in this case, that means paying additional taxes to make sure that our troops are well-equipped and protected, and to make sure we don't pass the cost of our spending on to a future generation. Americans have traditionally been asked to make sacrifices in times of war. Why should this war be any different?

That covers one sacrifice that I think all Americans should be willing to make. The second is national service. Although I don't believe in reinstating the draft at this point in time, I favor mandatory national service for all. It needn't be military service; in fact, I would hope that the majority wouldn't be involved in military service.

IMO, giving two years to your country is a relatively small sacrifice. I have plenty of personal experience with this too--almost all the men in my extended family have served. My father served in the Navy, both of my grandfathers served in the military as did all of my uncles. I have two cousins who are presently serving in Iraq. I completed two years of national service between college and grad school. I found my experience to be rewarding and never hesitate to recommend national service to anyone who asks me about my service.

I honestly haven't thought much about what benefits those who serve in the military deserve. I can't agree with giving them federal tax immunity, because then they won't be obliged to consider the costs of the policies they support. However, I think educational benefits of some sort make very good sense. But I admit I haven't spent any time at all considering what those educational benefits should be. Sorry to be short on details here.

I'm going to suggest one other sacrifice that I wish all Americans would voluntarily make. I'd like to see all Americans lose their "outrage" at people who disagree with them about the war. I'm tired of being labeled a traitor because I oppose the war; likewise, I'm annoyed when I hear good people who support the war called warmongers. Americans need to have intelligent discussions about policy issues, particularly national security issues, but because the idea of calm discussion isn't exciting enough, apparently, we let ourselves be sold on the notion of debate as combat. It doesn't serve us well.

I haven't had time to read carefully through your other post yet. I've printed it out (I had to get a new box of paper after doing so!) and will look at it tonight. I'll try to get back to you with a response by tomorrow.

Freder: there isnt a person on this board that doesnt know you are an insufferable ass; we now you are an absolute liar, pushing that christian identify crap and FBI knowledge as fact. As it turns out it was an assumption based on what I guess would be cannabis induced war stories! Then when some of us suggested you might report this stockpiling of automatic weapons and heavy machine guns, you declined. God knows you should come to the aid of the citizens against the very people you rail against.

Yeah: short answer: Liar and Coward--In fact, craven coward--your actions speak for themselves and you have documented them on this thread. Do you see Alpha Lib or Doyle, or HD or Cyrus or any of the other left leaning folks coming to your defense here? Is the silence deafening? They arent stupid--they can read and understand. Simply stated you are an idiot.

You have self destructed on this thread. You are a sorry excuse for a human being.

Cyrus: In my opinion you have hit the nail squarely on the head. The President's failure was to NOT communicate this struggle as a war that would require sacrifice and then make that sacrifice real.

I do not fault George Bush for strategic vision; I do not fault him for perseverence--but he has failed to rally the country around him and has failed miserably to keep his objectives in the forefront.

The most important role of the president is to communicate. Bill Clinton, bless his heart, could communicate; Ronald Reagan could communicate; unfortunately the skill seems to be a recessive genetic trait on the male side of the Bush family.

It is sad that the pentagon now does its planning based on the assumption if the mission is not achieved within three years the struggle is lost. Sad, but a good assumption.

I actually am a quite a national security hawk--but for the record, there are a lot of valid reasons to oppose this adventure the nation is engaged in, and it falls to the President to make it work. In that task, he has failed.All, of course, IMO.

Yes--the existence of WMDs was a big justification, but not the only justification, for the invasion.

I never claimed WMD were the only justification for the war. In fact, I mention two others, which I discount as significant. I believe the primary justification given in selling the war to the American people was WMD.

I don't claim that Bush lied about WMD and Iraq. Clearly he and many others were wrong, and I believe a very strong case can be made that the threat of WMD in Iraq was exaggerated.

Although I am willing to accept that Bush genuinely believed that Iraq might be trying to develop WMD capabilities, many of the claims that were made or implied were overstated. At the time, our most reliable information was coming from the weapons inspection team inside Iraq. They were doing valuable work (as other teams had done after the first Gulf War). They recommended that inspections be continued and we chose to reject that recommendation. IMO, it was a very poor choice.

It is also my understanding that biological and chemical weapons components, plans, etc. have been found in Iraq...

Nothing has been found to indicate that there was an active WMD program in Iraq. Not surprisingly, and consistent with testimony of Hans Blix, we continue to find small quantities of old munitions. In all cases, the chemical agents involved have degraded, as would be expected.

just not in the quantities that it was believed--by pretty nearly everyone in 2002 and 2003

Not by pretty nearly everyone. Certainly not by the inspectors. The people who seem to have got it most wrong were the politicians. Unfortunately, they were the people making the most noise, and making the decisions. Obviously we should think more carefully about who we trust and why.

Militias have been around for quite a while and tend to have guns, and big guns, and be a bit (massively) paranoid. Probably militias and survivalists are a reaction to the idea of nuclear war because they seem very much focused on being there when the dust settles.

But, seriously, how dangerous are they? How often do we hear about them *doing* anything? The Oklahoma bombing is a huge exception though that seems to have been one crazy with some help from his buddy and not the action of a survivalist group or militia.

"When civilization falls, we'll be ready" isn't nearly the same thing as being a danger to one's neighbors.

Koresh was a cult rather than a militia but was he a threat to the community? I'm not saying he was a good person or never hurt anyone, but did he ever hurt anyone who wasn't within his group?

Survivalists and militias and cults like Koresh might be scary and might be stockpiling weapons but it seems to me that they are stockpiling them in case they are attacked by the government (and self-fulfilling or not, that's what happened) and not because they are planning an armed uprising.

there isnt a person on this board that doesnt know you are an insufferable ass; we now you are an absolute liar, pushing that christian identify crap and FBI knowledge as fact. As it turns out it was an assumption based on what I guess would be cannabis induced war stories!

This thread has followed the typical pattern of assassinating me. First I make an anecdotal post to make a point. Then it is deliberately misinterpreted (I hope--I really can't believe that so many of you are so stupid as to so consistently completely miss the point I am making) and twisted around to make me look like a terrorist loving, simpering wimp who hates true Americans. Of course at some point Cedarford pops up to insult me. At least he has stopped calling me a cocksucker and now just hurls obscure Civil War epithets at me (which btw are accurate, if the confederacy tried to secede today, I would say good riddance, and take Idaho with you).

But today tops it all. Roger is convinced my little story about my friend's brother is some great revelation and has actually sent a message to the BATF about this thread! If anyone had bothered to take my advice, or even bothered to pay attention to what I actually wrote, and googled Christian Identity, not only would they have discovered the truly offensive sites of the Christian Identity movement but a myriad of sites dedicated to tracking and exposing the movement. Many of those sites complain about how the federal government just doesn't take the threat of these groups seriously enough and how all the complaints to the government about their heavily armed compounds and their threats about race war seem to fall on deaf ears.

Poor misunderstood Freder; poor baby, nasty old Roger and nasty old Cedarford call you on bullshit. And you don the persecution cloak. You are an embarasment to the left for gods sake. Doyle is at least funny (and understands baseball); HD can at least make a point, be an asshole, and maintain some credibility; Cyrus at least knows a hell of a lot, and can argue a position and marshall evidence on his behalf.

Regretably Freder: you deal in assertions, half truths, phoney BS and dont even have the cojones to cry havoc when those nasty fundamentalist christians stockpile weapons, because--because? oh thats right--your brothers friend is under their spell. What a fucking loser. You are not a turd in a punch bowl Freder: you are a carbuncle on the anus of the world.

i took some of the quotes you wrote out but didn't attribute and googled them.

can you imagine my surprise when i found out that you just copied, pasted and rearranged the attributes so it wouldn't appear that you copied and pasted.

i've know you were a putz moron for a long time now. that we can add dishonest to that i think is apparent. that you are the worst of shitheads is still up for debate but i think we that think you are have a good majority.

freder you idiot: DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND YOU ACCUSED THIS BUNCH OF CHRISTIAN NUTS OF STOCKPILING ILLEGAL WEAPONS?

Do you not think that should be actionable? obviously not. Your idiocy is beyond belief.

Well of course I do. But any idiot with a computer who googles exactly what I told you to will discover this is no fucking secret. Everybody who has the least interest in finding out about it knows this. They also refuse to pay federal income taxes and aren't shy about declaring it. For one reason or another, the federal government has chosen to leave these nuts alone, or at least leave their monitoring of such groups very low key. There are entire groups that spend their lives tracking these groups and are constantly bugging the government to take a more active role in monitoring them. Do you really think my little anecdote of one bit player in the group is going to make a whit of difference to the Feds?

Again, my initial point is lost in all the chaff. Compared to what these far right groups do every day, the muslim "terrorist" groups the government has brought down over the last couple years are rank amateurs. They have neither the organization, capability, or even numbers. As far as ideology goes--just check out some of the websites.

Again, my initial point is lost in all the chaff. Compared to what these far right groups do every day, the muslim "terrorist" groups the government has brought down over the last couple years are rank amateurs.

Now, Roger, I don't know what would have had you apologize for all your bad language and then go butt-fucking crazy. Maybe you misunderstood what I wrote. I of course was referring to great coups like the Lackawanna six, those morons in Miami, and this latest group of boneheads in New Jersey.

What have they *done*? They have weapons, sure, but knowing that and knowing where they are and *who* has them aren't the same thing. They can be arrested for having them.

Do you really think that the FBI *doesn't* infiltrate these groups? Or do you just think that because the group isn't declared illegal and *all* members arrested that no one cares?

Get good intel on where the guns actually *are* so a warrant can be issued and the feds (of whatever sort) are going to do something about it. If they start killing people, then arrest warrants will be issued.

When these guys start plotting missions... but as far as I can tell... they don't. They're getting ready for a big race war or the fall of civilization because they see it as inevitable. When God starts to tell them to *make* it happen then they'll be up there with the jihadist crazies who, no matter how loosely affiliated with larger organizations, feel they need to suicide for the cause.

Roger - Sadly, I have to agree. I have called Freder, accurately I think, a traitor and a terrorist rights lover.Thanks to your line of inquiry,one must add personal coward after you called him out to report his "white groups far worse than Mohammed Atta's group" and he said he was afraid to.

What a prime candidate for America to cleanse out of our lands.Interesting to note how Doyle, hdhouse, Cyrus would address how to secure the nation with an open terrorist ally like Freder.Kill him in an emergency, imprison him, send him packing to the Ummah, or let courts and ACLU lawyers determine Freder's due process?Again, my initial point is lost in all the chaff. Compared to what these far right groups do every day, the muslim "terrorist" groups the government has brought down over the last couple years are rank amateurs. They have neither the organization, capability, or even numbers.

If there are white supremests or whomever arming up in Colorado, I would seriously like to know where, even if you can't give specifics for some reason or another.

I live there, and would at least appreciate the chance to avoid that part of the state. This state isn't like Idaho or Montana where there are plenty of places where no one is going to look. Rather much of it is getting filled up, and that sort of heavily armed camp is the sort of place that everyone here should be warned to avoid. (Plus, I have no doubt that the CO authorities would love to shut it down if they indeed have a lot of illegal weapons there - the Democrats now control both the legislature and the governorship, and I am sure hate white supremists).

Bruce Hayden....so you like white supremicists? seems like you do. that certainly is attractive.

Cedarford: you use the terms traitor and terrorist lover fairly loosely. would you care to clarify who exactly you think is a traitor? You seem to be a gutless wonder of sorts. care to be more precise?

you are the embodiment of the right wing...anonymous name calling and either for some sort of nazi-like police state or a "traitor". yes i said nazi because of just about all your ilk that inhabits this blog, you are the closest to a closet full of brown shirts.

"When it comes to the attack on the compound in Waco, I have never understood why the feds didn't just pick up Koresh in Waco. He was known to go there for shopping every week with just a couple of people and in his own truck."

Like I said above, the compound my friend visited was indeed in Idaho, not Colorado. My friend's brother lives in the mountains west of Fort Collins where I understand there is quite an active and open Christian Identity church which he attends. In fact when my friend initially told me about his brother he told me the name of the pastor of his particular church. I believe that this is the church he attends and this is his father-in-law. So the state is well aware of their activities.

"you must realize that the idea of hijacking four planes with boxcutters and knocking down buildings would seem like "the dumbest fucking terrorist plot" if it hadn't happened."

Are you suggesting that the fact that some event actually happens one time somehow changes the likelihood of it happening in general? Although such an argument may seem intuitive given our short-lived and narrow view of time and events, it is a very shaky argument from a probabilistic point of view.

hdhouse: i took some of the quotes you wrote out but didn't attribute and googled them. can you imagine my surprise when i found out that you just copied, pasted and rearranged the attributes so it wouldn't appear that you copied and pasted.

What? The quotes from Democrats are from an article by Hayes, who's listed in the attribs. They are copied & pasted because they are quotes [duh]. I ordered them to be more concise, so that idiots like you might be able to follow along.

Cyrus: Fen, I haven't had time to read carefully through your other post yet. I've printed it out (I had to get a new box of paper after doing so!) and will look at it tonight. I'll try to get back to you with a response by tomorrow.

You don't really need to. The evidence of Saddam-AQ links speaks for itself. I'm just asking that you take an objective look at it, there's no need to debate it with me, although I'll engage if you insist.

I'm more interested in our other convo re sacrifices:

I'd like to see all Americans lose their "outrage" at people who disagree with them about the war. I'm tired of being labeled a traitor because I oppose the war

The problem is that too many anti-war peeps are dishonest in their opposition - they lie, distort, falsely accuse, exagerate, ignore evidence that counters their view. They attack our recruiters on campus, they attempt to physically disrupt deployment ops, they promote propaganda like the Newsweek Koran flushing, they wrap their opposition with BDS mantra -Bush Lied, Blood for Oil, Bush Knew, LIHOP, MIHOP etc. Same with their we support our troops when they frag their officers pickets, along with harassing returning wounded vets at Walter Reed with Maimed for a Lie

They're opposition is purely partisan, and not based in good faith. Anf they do in fact resemble the Copperheads.

When you present rational reasoned civil argument against the war, I listen and return the favor. I'm sorry if you've been wrongly lumped in with Copperheads, but you must understand that the anti-war crowd has destroyed any benefit of doubt I might lend to your intentions. Unfortunately, anyone who wishes to argue against the war must now first demonstrate its in good faith.

Hdhouse - The only person I have concluded is an enemy lover and traitor posting here is Freder. I don't use the "traitor" term lightly.

Freder - You may not like the options of what may happen to the Islamoid enemy-lovers in America after a State of Emergency is declared following a WMD attack. But you would be at risk. From military authorities if they knew of you, from neighbors also privy to your Jihadi liberties-supporting sentiments.

Especially if regular legal systems were out of commission and martial law was imposed, habeas suspended to round up enemy within and their 5th column.

When it has happened in many countries, including democracries in peril, the decision tree of options is obvious:

1. Kill the enemy and enemy supporters, especially if the threat is existential, safety of The People is in dire peril, and the urgency is too high to bother with establishing prisons or trials.(happened in various revoltions well into the 20th Century, in the Korean and Vietnamese "civil wars", various Latin American, African, Asian counterterror campaigns.)

You may not like the options of what may happen to the Islamoid enemy-lovers in America after a State of Emergency is declared following a WMD attack. But you would be at risk. From military authorities if they knew of you, from neighbors also privy to your Jihadi liberties-supporting sentiments.

Gee Cedarford, I would like you to show me one statement I have ever made on this or any other blog that demonstrates I am an "Islamoid enemy lover". Granted, I have accused this administration of committing war crimes but that is because Donald Rumsfeld has publicly admitted to them and I don't believe the president when he says "we don't torture" (plus, it is pretty much admitted that we have waterboarded detainees and waterboarding is considered torture by most people, including our very own state department). So by most objective standards, I think that is a reasonable charge to make.

You claimed I said that there are "white groups far worse than Mohammed Atta's group", even put it in quotes. Of course I never said anything of the sort.

You are the one who seems to want to use the tactics and methods of the terrorists. Seems to me that you, not I, have more in common with them.

Yeah right. And if I had written the exact same thing about the president--and let's make this perfectly clear, I never would, I absolutely disavow violence as a method to solve political differences and wouldn't even discuss political assassinations in jest--there wouldn't be half a dozen posters on this site calling for my head and having the Secret Service down on me like flies on shit.